No need to recap the plot or what there is of it.
In short, the movie's a mess. The fact that events throughout are being distorted by Jane's (Johns) troubled mind may explain the surreal approach, but doesn't lift the repetitive narrative. I suspect that if one were interested enough, the movie could be analyzed for supposed symbolism. For example, there's the revolving door that appears to revolve Jane in and out of her tormentor's office; or why it is that she's in every scene, staging which does make ultimate sense. But the tricks that are supposed to build suspense (What's going on in this weird place) soon become tiresome once they seem to go nowhere. At the same time, the jarring film score is like lemon on pickle. The arty photography is interesting at times, but fails to lift the repetitive storyline.
Now, I'm as big a fan of Johns as most anyone. Her fish-girl in the charming Miranda (1948) is perfect casting. Here, however, her little girl voice and abject behavior appear to be questionable casting, becoming at times shrill and bothersome. Nonetheless, I suspect getting someone of her movie stature was a coup for lowly Lippert Productions, traditionally a budget outfit, to say the least. Anyway, esteemed writer Bloch misfired on this one. Perhaps he got too subtle with his permutations on reality, but I'll leave that to a midnight study group. For me, the results are more tedious than interesting or even weird.
In short, the movie's a mess. The fact that events throughout are being distorted by Jane's (Johns) troubled mind may explain the surreal approach, but doesn't lift the repetitive narrative. I suspect that if one were interested enough, the movie could be analyzed for supposed symbolism. For example, there's the revolving door that appears to revolve Jane in and out of her tormentor's office; or why it is that she's in every scene, staging which does make ultimate sense. But the tricks that are supposed to build suspense (What's going on in this weird place) soon become tiresome once they seem to go nowhere. At the same time, the jarring film score is like lemon on pickle. The arty photography is interesting at times, but fails to lift the repetitive storyline.
Now, I'm as big a fan of Johns as most anyone. Her fish-girl in the charming Miranda (1948) is perfect casting. Here, however, her little girl voice and abject behavior appear to be questionable casting, becoming at times shrill and bothersome. Nonetheless, I suspect getting someone of her movie stature was a coup for lowly Lippert Productions, traditionally a budget outfit, to say the least. Anyway, esteemed writer Bloch misfired on this one. Perhaps he got too subtle with his permutations on reality, but I'll leave that to a midnight study group. For me, the results are more tedious than interesting or even weird.